I'm confused about the types of clauses which would express a statement like: "I am happy that I have received your letter." I can't use indirect discourse, because I would end up with something like: "I am happy because I received your letter" or "Since I have received your letter, I am happy," which would become "I know/think/perceive that I am happy...," which is entirely redundant.

My second thought was a result clause, something like: "Laetus sum ut litteras tuas acceperim" However, this doesn't seem correct, because I am not stating the result of my happiness, but its cause. My third thought was to use a causal clause "Laetus sum quia litteras suas accepisse," but this sounds stilted, and doesn't appear to convey the tone of the English.

I think your second option is better: "litteras tuas acceptis, laetus sum quoniam..." At least, I think it better approximates the sense of the original.

1. Laetus sum, cum litteras tuas acceperim, ut hanc rem futura suscipiam was intended to translate as: "I am glad, since I have received your letter, that you will take up this matter in the future." I tried to say this on the basis of other subjunctive clause types using "that" as one of several possibilities, and to use the ablative of time with "futurus," used nominally, since there is no future subjunctive. I think a more correct adaptation would be: Laetus sum, cum litteras tuas acceperim, quoniam hanc rem suscipies, after your suggestion.

futuro because the neuter would be the correct form, or because futurus, -i is a masculine noun? My dictionary doesn't list a nominal form, so I assume the ablative is neuter by default, then.

Also: you wrote: "litteris tuis acceptis, quod...id mihi placet" Is there a reason to prefer the ablative absolute to a cum causal clause, i.e. "cum litteras tuas acceperim, laetus...," or is this a stylistic matter?

I am happy, having received your letter, that you...[x]. = ablative absolute usage, [x] was in the letter, but was not the cause of the happiness.I am happy, because I received your letter, and to hear [x] = cum-causal would have to include the contents of the letter.I am happy, under the circumstances of receiving your letter / when I received..., to hear...[x] = cum temporal or circumstantial.

I am happy, having received your letter, that you...[x]. = ablative absolute usage, [x] was in the letter, but was not the cause of the happiness.I am happy, because I received your letter, and to hear [x] = cum-causal would have to include the contents of the letter.I am happy, under the circumstances of receiving your letter / when I received..., to hear...[x] = cum temporal or circumstantial.

Sorry, but I really don't understand what you're getting at with any of this. What exactly are you trying to say, again, in English? Because all these examples look like different things to me, and some of them make little sense.

In Latin, you indicate the cause of a feeling/emotion with quod + indicative (or subjunctive if it's merely the alleged cause). You can also sometimes use indirect discourse (acc. + inf.), and I don't understand what your objection to that is.

What do you think the difference is between the three English versions you gave in the OP? "I am happy that I have received your letter." / "I am happy because I received your letter" / "Since I have received your letter, I am happy." They all mean the same thing to me (except for a possible temporal interpretation of the last one, which I don't think you even noticed).

Quickly of course can speak for himself, but what he said in the last post seemed clear to me, in the essentials at least.Pro ipse certè quickly respondere potest, sed mihimet clarum fuit quod in proximâ epistolâ scripserat seu essentia saltem eius, ut viderit.

Having received your letter, I was happy to hear that... = Ablative absoluteBecause I received your letter, I was happy to hear that... = cum causalWhen I received your letter, I was happy to hear that... = cum temporal

Is that not OK? Nonnè licet?

Imber Ranae wrote:In Latin, you indicate the cause of a feeling/emotion with quod + indicative (or subjunctive if it's merely the alleged cause). You can also sometimes use indirect discourse (acc. + inf.), and I don't understand what your objection to that is.

I think so, too, returning to the original post, but I understand wanting to work with "cum" clauses as much as possible because they're harder to get a hold of (or that's as I find it). Then all next week, one might try to say everything (or as much as possible) using accusative infinitives, to practise them so they might become second nature. Certainly that's what I tend to do,—although things still aren't second nature to me.Tecum concurro, quoad primô scriptum erat. Quod clausulis per "cum" quàm saepissimè uti velis, id autem deligere possum, quia tales minùs facilè capiuntur (ut puto). Dein hebdomadam proximam, omnia (vel tàm multa quàm possible est) per accusativo infinitivo comprehendere coneris, ut illa forma ex consuetudine in naturam vertatur. Sic facere est id quod ego quidem specto seu tendo,—etiamsi adhûc in naturam mihi res non intrant.